whistle blower

exactly.

well if the city realizes that garage is in an easement they'll be told to remove it. so if you left on bad terms then drop a dime.

The fuel oil tank was something I discovered while observing grading for a strip footing - there was literally a pipe/hole going into the earth right on-center of a strip footing.... I pointed it-out to my boss, but He looked at it and said "f-it" get this concrete poured....the garage thing was from him reading a dimension from the wrong side of a wall.....it's a foot into the alley.

1. Potential underground fuel/oil storage tank...  Can someone briefly explain how serious this is and the potential risks?

three things are plaguing my conscience now (they didn't while I still worked there)

This makes it sound like sour grapes, but maybe you just wanted to keep the paychecks rolling in and food on the table.  Still it is wayyyyy past time for people to start doing it right and stop ffffing around.  Or we can be like China where they put poison in the baby formula and no one has the balls to speak up.

If you decide to turn them in do it John Wayne style and walk into their lobby and make the call from your cell phone ;)

Dear Tan Gent;           since you asked for Archie's opinion:   Just a question- why didn't this bother yoru conscience when you were workig on the project?  Does the architect know about this?  If I were you, I would consider talking to the architect about it, if you have a good relationship. He or she can then look into the issues before it becomes the owners problem.  You are going to look like a bit of a jerk no matter what- you did not do anything about it until you left.   Better late than never though. Think about this from the home owners position- some day they go to sell the house, a survey is done and they find out the garage is over the property line....

Obviously this is all bootlegged work also, right?

I know from previous experience that the issue with the fuel storage tank could be a cause for concern.  When doing soil testing for pollutants, one of the items looked at in the phase 1 testing stage is what the site was formerly used for.  For instance, we were working on a project where between 1920-1980 there was both a gas station as well as a paint sales company, with those two items alone causing us to have to get more extensive testing done to the soils (a phase 2).  The fuel storage tanks, in our case, were long gone from the site when we started work (the site was just a series of open lots) but it didn't preclude us from having to do further investigations to determine if we had soil remediation issues to deal with.  In your case, with those tanks being essentially encased in concrete, I am not sure how much of an issue that might cause.

If you are in Chicago and you are overhanging a property line, you won't necessarily have to move the building element protruding.  You would have to get the appropriate zoning administrative adjustment (or variance, depending on the severity of the issue they are two different things) and the owner would then have to pay a yearly fee to the city for the encroachment, as well as get alderman approval for the encroachment.  We have worked on a number of projects (all commercial) where the owners are okay with paying encroachments because they are necessary (signage, awnings, fire escapes and other assorted existing building elements).  Keep in mind that those yearly fees for encroachments can be quite expensive, though and the process behind the zoning and aldermanic issues will take a decent amount of time; administrative adjustments = a month or two, variances = 4-6 months (depending on the specific case).

Specifically, what is the make-up air duct for?  If it was included in the design, it was probably put there for a specific reason (whether that be code or good design principles).  If the project was bid as that being part of the scope of work, then the contractor owes it to the end-user to include it in the final built work unless he took it out and gave the client a credit for the exclusion of the make-up air duct.

You may end up looking like a jerk for reporting your former employer, but your former employer looks like an even bigger jerk (or, possibly incompetent) for excluding or glossing over these issues.  Everyone makes mistakes, but just ignoring them and trying to sweep them under the rug when you know they are wrong doesn't do anyone any favors.

I'm sorry TanGent, but I really have no respect for what you're thinking of doing.

When ethical behaviour could have effected you (when you were employed by these people), you did nothing at all.  If you had acted then, it would have been brave and commendable.

Now that you're safe, you suddenly have a conscience?

The difference in your timing isn't only about whether you put yourself at risk or not.  Whistleblowing now, after the work is done or has progressed significantly will mean that it will cost many thousands (probably many hundreds of thousands by the sound of it) more to fix, as they'll have to tear things out/down to get to that oiltank, to put in that duct, and to relocate that garage wall.  So waiting until it was convenient to you to whistleblow will mean 5-10 times the cost to fix things.

But wait, that's not all...beyond the construction costs, now the contractor/owner/architect/engineers/surveyor/etc. all get to sue each other, costing them all many $ in legal fees, increased insurance premiums, etc.

I don't agree with any of the things you describe the contractor doing, but you had a chance to do the right thing.  You chose not to.

If you're seriously considering this, and not just blowing off steam/fantasizing, I recommend you talk to a lawyer first...I'd ask them if you could be sued, since your failure to report these problems in a timely manner will be the direct cause of so much of the cost of fixing things now rather than then.

Let me be clear regarding my culpability here....

1. I pointed out the (potential tank) to my boss, after that, it was his responsibility.....

2. The air duct omission was a decision between boss / owner / and architect, albeit a required element per City

3. The Garage over the lot line issue, is completely the responsibility of former boss - I did not participate in the layout or construction of the garage, but overheard him discussing it with someone on the phone..

I worked as an environmental engineer on underground storage tank removals.  If the tank is still there, (and that would be surprising because if I remember correctly they were all required by law to be removed by 1997 or 1998), and it had a leak when it was in use then contamination of the ground water is a real possibility.  Depending on the type of material being stored, there may be BTEX or VOC contamination. These are carcinogenic. There's also the possibility that it went in after the '97 law went into effect.

My guess is that the cost of removal would fall on the owner as they should have done a Phase 1 environmental assessment prior to purchasing the property.  Of course tearing up and replacing the slab that is now over the tank might be the contractor’s responsibility.
 

your failure to report these problems in a timely manner will be the direct cause of so much of the cost of fixing things now rather than then.

Lets be clear.  The bosses decision to not follow the rules is the cause.  Had he done the right thing to begin with there would be no chance to turn him in.  Does anybody take responsibility for their actions anymore or when we are wrong is it always the guys fault who points it out????????

Thanks for that explanation EdgewoodAnimal.  As bad as that sounds there is so much pollution coming from everywhere that if the boss was basically a decent honest guy I could probably overlook it.

okay, so I did the right thing. I've sent emails to the owner, architect, and the former employer outlining the aforementioned concerns. Lets see what happens - thanks for your help.

Did you not read jcarch's post? He was spot on. Good luck.

@w.a.d.w. - yes I appreciate jcarch's comments and I did in fact retain a lawyer and she adivised that i take those steps intially, soon. I feel much better now, thank you. It'll be tomorrow morning before thay get the messages, and I must refrain from discussing this any further - thanks for your help, life's too short to arry this kind of baggage.

Glad to hear you did speak with a lawyer before continuing down this path. I understand the need to do the right thing, but particularly at this point, you also have to weigh the personal cost of your involvement, both financially and emotionally. Sounds like you have. I wish you the best moving forward.